memory (ram) error

[glasscleaner]

i use the debian based Ubuntu 5.04 and when i look at my system monitor, i can only see 885.4mb aviable ram but in fact i have 2x 512mb installed. the amount of ram detected by the bios at startup is 1024mb.

someone have any idea to recover my rest of ram?

thanks

screenshot:

[markwolfe Veteran]

Could you post the output of the free command?

Also, do you have on-board video on your motherboard? Without knowing more, I would say that it sounds like shared video memory to me. (that would be a BIOS setting to change or eliminate this, if you are using an add-in card)

[Nichotin]

I just solved that problem. I enabled high memory support in the kernel.

[glasscleaner]

how do you enable that?

im noob :(

[glasscleaner]

  markjensen said:

Could you post the output of the free command?

Also, do you have on-board video on your motherboard?  Without knowing more, I would say that it sounds like shared video memory to me.  (that would be a BIOS setting to change or eliminate this, if you are using an add-in card)

586015634[/snapback]

that i was thinking first. and no, i dont have memmory shared. btw when i have memmory shared, at startup my bios detect not the "real" ram but the free ram

[rezza Veteran]

  glasscleaner said:

how do you enable that?

im noob :(

586015887[/snapback]

If you use a pre-compiled kernel that came with your distro, you won't be able to. You'll have to live with not getting full use of your memory.

If you are capable of configuring and recompiling your own custom kernel, you need to make sure the "High Memory" option is set to something other than "off". (4gb would be sensible).

A caveat: If you have 1 gig of RAM, it is generally considered better to leave high memory support off, because it involves an extra layer of abstraction in the memory management calls which slow down memory access (akin to having a larger CAS latency). The choice is less available but faster ram, or all your ram availablebut slower. The 128mb or whatever the difference is isn't all that much anyway.

[Miuku.]

  rezza said:

The 128mb or whatever the difference is isn't all that much anyway.

586023266[/snapback]

:blink:

What? Losing 128MB is not much? :wacko:

[rezza Veteran]

  daPhoenix said:

:blink:

What? Losing 128MB is not much?  :wacko:

586023278[/snapback]

It depends on what you're using the box for. If you're gaming and want fast ram response times, then lose the extra 128mb. If you're running lots of big apps like OpenOffice.org with large files in GIMP and 200 firefox tabs, then sacrifice the speed for the extra ram. There is no real one "right" answer, but most people tend to keep the lower ram amount.

Oh, and fixed spelling in thread title.

[ichi]

The Con Kolivas kernel patches add an option to support exactly 1GB of ram, rather than going directly from <1GB to 4GB. Not sure about how it performs though.

[Miuku.]

  rezza said:

If you're running lots of big apps like OpenOffice.org with large files in GIMP and 200 firefox tabs, then sacrifice the speed for the extra ram

586023302[/snapback]

Hehe :). I can nuke 1GB of memory with a few "simple" multilayer images.

Wish I had some extra money to invest, I'd go for 4GB in a snap :)

[rezza Veteran]

  daPhoenix said:

Hehe :). I can nuke 1GB of memory with a few "simple" multilayer images.

Wish I had some extra money to invest, I'd go for 4GB in a snap :)

586023633[/snapback]

Ha, would be nice, eh? ;)

I can only dream of having enough disposable income for that...